The best moment on TV this week was on The Colbert Report when George Lucas showed up to show off his entry in The Green Screen Challenge, a set up for viewers to offer their filmmaking skills by including Colbert in a light saber battle against nefarious evils.
George did himself proud and at show's end even battled Colbert mano a mano.
And George's "film" has a hilarious moment when Colbert and Jar Jar talk about politics. Take a look.
And of course, the big news about the internets this week was Google's stock purchase of YouTube. Some, like Atomic Tumor, worry about the course this will take and if it means the death of YouTube.
Since YouTube has recently signed agreements with Universal, Sony, BMG and others to use their materials, and since Google already has similar arrangements with other entertainment companies, I tend to think the average user will benefit from the deal and still be able to access tv and music clips and still upload and enjoy clips of chuckleheads who light their farts.
A interesting debate on the deal can be read at MetaFilter. What surprised me about the deal was that Google, who had enough cash to buy YouTube, decided instead to offer a stock deal. Not so good for current stockholders, great for YouTube's owners.
Also, viewing videos and internet trends can be tracked so well with this new combo, Google appears to have added a massive consumer habits database, which all the companies which hold copyright would dearly love to have. I'd say viral video marketing is going to rise faster than the floodwaters in New Orleans. The New Yorker has more on this ten-month old company.
Nice find, Joe!
ReplyDeletenice pic, WM!
ReplyDeleteand they may be the best career move in some time for George!
um, make it "that" and not "they".
ReplyDeletewhere's my coffee??
I think that you tube thing twill catch on.... 'jes guesin though
ReplyDeleteYour comment that an all-stock deal was bad for Google's shareholders is akin to saying that Sergy and Larry fell off the turnip truck. Your statement would hold true only if Google's stock is currently undervalued, with the result that their shareholders will suffer dilution to their holdings that exceeds the value added by the acquisition. But if you believe as I do that Google's stock is richly valued (at 63 times earnings), then management was smart in using that as their currency of choice. And the interests of their shareholders have been well served--including the two largest ones who should have no reason to act against their own best interests.
ReplyDeleteHiya Jerry!
ReplyDeleteAfter lurking all this time, you found something to comment on at last!
Fun isn't it?
And as long as stockholders are happy, all is a happy green meadow of rainbows and unicorns.
Thanks, Joe, for that brilliant retort and sparkling display of rapier wit. But I have to dispel your delusion that I'm a regular consumer of your megalomaniacal drivel. I've searched carefully for a kernel of wisdom or insight in your ruminations and given up in despair. Your latest uninformed remarks moved me to post a comment. But intelligent critiques on your site are apparently met with derision. This will be my final posting since I have no interest in engaging in a battle of wits with an unarmed man.
ReplyDeleteflatterer!
ReplyDeleteTalk to me, baby.
ReplyDeleteNo, seriously. Talk to me. I hear your voice is hella sexy.
As for Goerge Lucas and my boyfriend duking it out light saber style, it was cool for sure, but couldn't hold a candle to Cooking With Feminists. That was good television, my friend.
Cooking w/ Feminists was indeed fine - those interested can witness the wonders via the link at Tits' place. (And the images of your recent feast complete with apple pie were fantastic!!)
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, my voice can throw a jedi-quality mindwarp on ya. So I have to be careful how I use it. Calibrating a podcast on this page with my real voice is like working with nuclear fission, baby, yeah!!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteA note to Jerry R.(if I can get Blogger to take my comment... erg):
ReplyDeleteUsing such caustic terms as "megalomaniacal drivel" hardly classifies as "intelligent critiques." We would all be interested to see the other side of the coin on the Google stock. Providing well-researched links helps to back up an opinion; sarcasm will incur our wrath...or my sarcasm... and I'm a sharp shooter with the sarcasm rifle. Hell, I have a sarcasm Gatlin Gun, and I'm loaded for bear in that battle. So if you want to get ugly, bring it on, but don't confuse differing opinion with some sort of war cry. The "derision" bomb was set off by you.
Sorry, editor, but I will not rise to the bait of your sophomoric bluster. It's clear that my policy of not battling the intellectually unarmed has even greater applicability in your case.
ReplyDeletewhaaa?? you're still here? i thought we wuz all beneath you!
ReplyDeletehaving this Cup of Joe is mighty addictive! not to mention just plain fun.
please stay as long as you wish, read often and, here in America and even on this blog, there is room for many opinions!
Well Jerry... ya got me. I'm just so dim-witted to have opined in any way. What was I thinking? To come up against such pristine intellect such as yours... Oh... we are all so humbled by your furiously righteous indignation. I'm quaking in my sophomoric shoes (must be all that bluster). That someone like you who ranks his intelligence so highly would even consider just whispering (ever so insipidly) your wee non-comment comment onto this page...
ReplyDeleteReality check:
Jerry,
We have a name for people like you: bully. Others would call you an abuser. You went on the attack the moment you began your diatribe, and you can't wiggle out of it by faking cleverness. Put up or shut up. I've known Joe for 15 years, and you are completely off the mark as to his IQ (and mine, for that matter—I don’t remember you having ever given me an IQ test, and I doubt you have access to my academic records or my vita). Oh, and it's The Editor, not “editor.” Capitol ‘T’, capitol ‘E’. I don’t refer to you as “jerry.”
You want to conjure the sophomoric? So be it:
I really have no idea what crawled up your butt and died, but I think we can all agree that it sure does stink.
If you want to have an intelligent discussion, cease with the hurling of unwarranted vitriol and discontinue covering us all under your unwashed blanket of assumption. There is room for differing opinion in here, but you don’t have to be a schmuck about it.
Joe:
Jerry’s on my side of the car seat. He’s touching me! Make him stop!
JR, you contradicted youself in many statments, such as "But I have to dispel your delusion that I'm a regular consumer of your megalomaniacal drivel. I've searched carefully for a kernel of wisdom or insight in your ruminations and given up in despair. ".. You say you don't read him, then you clearly do to decide you don't like his writings. And I am certain his tracking device would prove you wrong about your visits.
ReplyDeleteWe all love Joe, he's a great guy and presents lots of points of view.
Regardless, You have gone way too far, too personal, and if you want to publish your own comments about your views, get your damn blog.
Just want to add (and then I'll shut the eff up): it wasn't Jerry's original comment that set me off, it was his reaction (comment #2) to Joe's response to that comment that got my fur in a fussy.
ReplyDeleteJoe made with the funny; Jerry made with the nasty.
Perhaps the Cup of Joe Powell caveat should be: "Go no further unless you have a sense of humor."
Jiminey Christmas!!
ReplyDeleteEveryone take some time to breathe and find a happy place for a minute. Honest to Pete, I'll pull this blog over right now and turn around and we'll ALL go home.
Now c'mon. Who wants to stop at the next Stuckey's and get some pecan log rolls?
Heh! He said Log Roll...
ReplyDelete